Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
20051207
WASHINGTON COUNTY HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION County Administrative Annex 80 West Baltimore Street Hagerstown, Maryland 21740-6003 Telephone: 240-313-2430 FAX: 240-313-2431 Deaf and Hard of Hearing call 7-1-1 for Maryland Relay AGENDA HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND CONFERENCE ROOM 1A & B WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE ANNEX 80 WEST BALTIMORE STREET December 7, 2005 7:00PM M A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Minutes — November 2, 2005 C. Communications & Bills 1. Forum News * E. Unfinished Business F. Budget G. New Business 1. Preliminary Consultation review — Allison Avenue 2. New Member recommendations H. Other Business I. Executive Session J. Adjournment * = written material enclosed HDC\ADEC'05.DOC NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MAY MEET IN CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.508, STATE GOVERNMENT ARTICLE, ANNOTATED CODE OF MARYLAND. INDIVIDUALS REQUIRING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS ARE REQUESTED TO CONTACT THE WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT. CONTACT PERMITS DEPARTMENT AT (301) 791-3065 VOICE/TDD TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. www.washco-md.net RECYCLEDPAPER MINUTES HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY November 2, 2005 A and B. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chairman Michael Gehr called the regular monthly meeting of the Historic District Commission to order on Wednesday, November 2, 2005 at 7:05 p.m. in Conference Room 1 of the Washington County Administrative Annex, 80 West Baltimore Street. Members present included: Michael Gehr, Jane Hershey, Sandra Izer and Carla Viar. Also present was County Commissioner Dori Nipps and Staff members Steve Goodrich and Debra Eckard. C. MINUTES Ms. Izer made a motion to approve the October 5, 2005 minutes as presented. Seconded by Ms. Hershey. Unanimously approved. D. COMMUNICATIONS AND BILLS Mr. Goodrich stated that the latest copy of the Forum Journal is available at the County Planning Department for members to read. Mr. Goodrich presented a letter received from the State Highway Administration regarding proposed improvements to the existing storm drain system at the intersection of U.S. Route 11 and Englewood Road. The State Highway Administration stated, "no historic built resources will be affected by the project". The Commission has no comment on this project. E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS The Board of County Commissioners, at their regular meeting on October 25, 2005, reappointed Michael Gehr to the Historic District Commission for a three-year term extending to October 31, 2008. F. BUDGET CLG Application Matching Funds This item was discussed as New Business. G. NEW BUSINESS RZ-05-010 and CP-05-003 — Cloverly Mr. Goodrich presented for review and comment an application for a zoning map amendment to rezone property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Maryland Route 64 and Maryland Route 77. The property is currently zoned A — Agricultural, A(R) — Agricultural Rural and EC — Environmental Conservation. The applicant is requesting a zoning designation of RR — Residential Rural. The applicant is also requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to enlarge the Smithsburg Town Growth Area Boundary to include approximately 56 acres of property. The property proposed to be included in the Growth Area currently has a Washington County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policy Area classification of Agriculture and Environmental Conservation in the Rural Area. The amendment proposes that this property be included in the Town Growth Area with a policy designation of Low Density Residential. The developer is proposing 72 single-family residential lots on approximately 62 acres. Discussion: There was a brief discussion regarding ownership of the property and the knowledge that the developer knew the current zoning on the property and the land uses associated with that zoning designation when the property was purchased. It was noted that if the proposed zoning designation is granted and the property is put in the Town of Smithsburg Growth Area, it would allow more dense development. There is also concern regarding the negative affect on other historic properties in close proximity to the proposed development. Mr. Goodrich noted that the Staff does not support individuals requesting amendments to the Comprehensive Plan because it takes away from the Board of County Commissioner's long range planning responsibilities. Ms. Izer made a motion to forward the following comments to the Washington County Planning Department. The Historic District Commission is pleased that the developer has shown sensitivity to the historic structures located on the property; however, they are of the opinion that additional density on the property would have a negative affect on these historic structures and other historic structures in close proximity to the proposed development. Seconded by Ms. Viar. Unanimously approved. CLG FFY 2006 Application Mr. Goodrich presented for review and approval an application for Certified Local Government matching grant funds for FFY 2006. The proposed project for this application is Phase IV of the Rural Community Survey which will include Downsville, Brownsville, Bakersville, Gapland, Garrett's Mill and Mt. Lena communities. The Comprehensive Plan categorizes these communities as Rural Villages with the RV - Rural Village zoning designation. The total estimated project cost is $28,500 that includes the 40% local match of $10,000 that will be included in the HDC's FY 2006-2007 budget request. Commissioner Nipps noted that these surveys would be helpful to the Board of County Commissioners when offering incentives to developers to save historic structures on property proposed for development. Ms. Hershey made a motion to approve the CLG FFY 2006 application as presented. Seconded by Ms. Viar. Unanimously approved. H. OTHER BUSINESS In response to member's questions, there was a brief discussion regarding past demolition permits reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Goodrich reported that the HDC has influenced some developers to save historic structures or to reuse parts of historic structures that were demolished. He noted that the developer of Freedom Hills in Maugansville has decided to preserve the historic house on its own parcel and the barn will be taken down and the parts reused on another property. ADJOURNMENT Ms. Hershey made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Seconded by Ms. Viar. Unanimously approved. Respectfully submitted, Stephen T. Goodrich Chief Senior Planner STG/dse rum news tional host Forum, a program of the CenterforPreservatlon Leadership, NatlonaITrust for Hlstodc Preservation • Nov./Dec. 2005 • VolumeXll• No.2 BRAC 2005: What Community and Preservation Advocates Should Know ..... ...... . ........ .... . .... by Kent Rubman, Forum News editor BRAC—Base Realignment and Closure —is the congressionally authorized process used by the U.S. Department of Defense to review and restructure its domestic military installations to, according to the DoD website, "more efficiently and effectively support our forces, increase oper- ational readiness and facilitate new ways of doing business." BRAC 2005 is underway right now, with plans to close 25 major military bases and recon- figure 26 others. Four previous rounds —which took place in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995 — resulted in the closure of 97 major bases. As in past BRAC rounds, some significant historic resources are on the closure list. They include Fort Monroe in Virginia, a National Historic Landmark (1819-1834) featuring a star fort with a moat; Fort McPherson in Georgia, whose National Regis- ter District includes 40 buildings from the fort's late -19th -century origins; and numerous smaller Reserve Centers throughout the country, such as Vancouver Bar- racks in Washington (1890- 1940) and- Fort Hayes, Ohio (1880-1920). "When working with potential developers and others, we must overcome the mindset that a historic designation is an impediment to the reuse of the property and show that it is actu- ally an opportunity," says Mau- reen Sullivan, who is the DoD federal preservation officer, working for the Undersecretary of Defense (Installations and Environment). "We must con- vey how these historic properties can be an engine for redevelop- ment." During BRAC 2005, Sullivan and other colleagues will be providing guidance to help the local communities affected by major base closures to find new uses and appropriate treatments for the historic prop- erties that are made surplus. BRAC 2005 Decisions On May 13, following an exten- sive evaluation of all military installations in the United States and its territories, the Depart- ment of Defense submitted to the president, the Congress, and the Base Closure and Realignment Commission its recommenda- tions on which installations to close, expand, consolidate, or otherwise restructure. These recommendations went to the BRAC Commission (www.brac.gov), an independent body appointed by the president "to provide an objective, thor- ough, accurate, and non-partisan review and analysis" of that list. The commission studied data on each facility, solicited public comments, held dozens of public hearings and regional site visits, then made its own recom- mendations to President Bush on September 15. The president approved these one week later and forwarded the report to Congress. The deci- sions will become binding in 45 legislative days unless Congress acts to reject the list in full, which has never happened before. continuedonpage2 For the complete list of major base closures and realignments approved by the president and now awaiting congressional approval, go to www. brac.gov/finalreport.asp (see Executive Summary and Appendix Q). BRAG 2005 continued, f om page] Implementation: DoD Office of Economic Adjustment and Local Redevelopment Authorities A six -year implementation period is scheduled to begin in 2006. Within the first six months after the BRAC decisions are final, property not needed by the DoD or by other federal agencies will be identified as surplus and made available to other users. The DoD Office of Eco- nomic Adjustment (OEA) will be helping affected communi- ties manage the transition, including helping them plan new uses for surplus properties and carrying out civilian reuse of former military property. Last May the OEA sent an intro- ductory letter to local officials in jurisdictions that may be affected, along with a DVD called Communities Responding to Change, with brief case stud- ies and advice from colleagues who faced previous base clo- sures, and the printed report Responding to Change: Commu- nities and BRAC—an Overview of the BRAC Process, which out- lines how the OEA and com- munities will work together. Both are available on the OEA website—www.oea.gov—along with numerous other resources, including a "Community Reac- tion Guide." The jurisdiction(s) affected by each closure or major change where property will be available for reuse should form a Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) to "speak with one voice" to the Military Departments (as dis- posal agents of this property), OEA, and all other public and private interests. The LRA will be responsible for preparing the redevelopment plan and/or directing the implementation of the plan. The LRA should include representatives from the affected jurisdiction(s): political leaders, potential pub- lic and private sector users of the base property, providers of services for the homeless (by law, the LRA must balance needs of the homeless in the community with other commu- nity and economic needs when planning the use of surplus property), other nonprofit edu- cation and health institutions, business leaders, tribal represen- tatives when appropriate, and other interested organizations and individuals. The OEA will assign aproj- ect manager to each affected community, to provide techni- cal assistance and advice, The OEA also offers grants to sup- port reuse plans and related studies, and helps coordinate assistance from other federal agencies. Special Help for Historic Resources A special committee of preser- vation specialists, the BRAC CulturalResources Work Group, has been convened to provide information about the obli- gations and opportunities for reuse of surplus historic proper- ties. Along with Sullivan (the DoD's federal preservation officer), it includes historic preservation specialists from the Military Departments (Army, Navy, and Air Force), OEA, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, National Park Service, National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO), and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. "Our goal is to facilitate, in the simplest way, access to information on the historic preservation process —to be a resource for a wide variety of audiences in the BRAC world," Sullivan explains. That includes providing information on the use of covenants and easements to protect historic properties that are conveyed to new users; on the availability of federal historic rehabilitation tax credits and other incentives to help finance adaptive use projects; and on the Section 106 consultation process. Installations must conduct this review process when historic properties leave federal owner- ship or where there is a possible adverse impact on historic resources that are listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places to determine how to avoid or lessen that impact. The work group plans a series of speaking engage- ments to key organizations and affected communities on BRAC and the reuse of historic resources. On September 29 it led an educational session at the 2005 National Preservation Conference in Portland, Ore. [An audio recording is available from HMR Duplications in California, (510) 482.8732, Hmroakland@aol.com; order #325.] It will also give a presen- tation at NCSHPO's annual meeting in March, with more to be scheduled in response to community needs. The group is also develop- ing a website—www.denix. osd.mil/CR-BRAC--designed to be a portal for information about historic preservation to all parties involved in the BRAC process, at all levels of expertise. FORUMM. 'NEWS It will include fact sheets for different audiences (installation personnel, LRAs, SHPOs, developers, the general public) and links to key sections of other websites. Experience from Previous Base Closures "Base Realignments and Clo- sures cause near -term social and economic disruption," the Department of Defense con- cedes on its website. "However, there are many success stories continued on page 6 zt works! success stories in preservation ................................................................. Knox Heritage Plan Blends New Theater with Historic Streetscape City leaders and residents of Knoxville, Tenn., were delighted when Mayor Bill Haslam announced last January that Regal Entertainment Group had agreed to operate a proposed eight -screen movie theater in the 500 block of Gay Street. That block had been lan- guishing for decades under pri- vate and then public ownership. Knox County purchased the properties in 1998 for a new jus- tice center. When that plan was later shelved, the county held them for a proposed theater and transit center. Most of the late- 19th- and early -20th -century commercial buildings now sit empty alongside some surface parking lots and unused parcels. For years, city and regional plans had recommended putting a movie theater on that block to help spur downtown redevelop- ment. The theater would put "feet on the street," attracting local residents and regional visitors to the downtown, espe- cially on evenings and week- ends when activity levels are low. New retail businesses and restaurants were expected to follow. Mayor Haslam made a new theater (without the transit center) a priority soon after he took office in December 2003. But while the mayor and others touted what would be gained, Knox Heritage, Inc. — the private nonprofit preserva- tion organization for Knox County, which includes Knox- ville —raised concerns about what would be lost. The city presented two alternative designs for the the- ater in January 2005. The first, costing approximately $8 mil- lion, would have ravaged the streetscape by demolishing six of the eight historic buildings; among them the S&W Cafete- ria, one of the state's finest Art Deco structures and once a well- known city meeting place; and the Art Deco Walgreen's Build- ing, site of Civil Rights sit-ins. Five are contributing structures in the National Reg- ister —listed Gay Street Com- mercial Historic District. Their loss, combined with other losses over the years, could threaten the historic district designation. And that would mean property owners in the district would lose access to historic rehabili- tation tax credits for their own revitalization projects. The city's second proposal was for a two-story theater that would preserve 60 feet of the S&W Cafeteria Building, the Walgreen's Building, and one other, but would cost con- siderably more —approximately $11.7 million. Knox Heritage thought it could do better, and Mayor Haslam gave the group 45 days, and $10,000 in matching funds, to try, The Knox Heritage Board of Directors created the 500 Block Task Force to evaluate the condition of the historic buildings; create alternative designs that would preserve as much of the buildings as pos- sible while meeting the needs of the theater operator; determine the costs of the alternative pro- posals; and develop funding strategies to meet the needs of the city and its partners. Crucial to its success, the task force brought together people with key expertise, including four architects who are members of Knox Heritage or its board, and representatives of the National Trust who advised on financing. The state historic preservation office also provided guidance. The task force presented two design options in April 2005. Both would preserve major portions of five buildings (one was deemed too deterio- rated to save) by placing part of the theater in an existing gap and wrapping the rest around the backs of the buildings in empty or underutilized lots. Both would cost about the same as the city's initial design, with financial benefits coming from lower demolition costs as well as the use of New Markets Tax Credits and historic rehabilita- tion tax credits. The city and Regal approved the task force's second plan, which preserves less of the buildings but is still acceptable to Knox Heritage. "We were close to losing everything," said Knox Her- itage Executive Director Kim Trent, who praised Mayor Haslam for his leadership. "Now we've figured out a way to develop the movie theater, and get retail tax from that, and also generate property and retail tax from reuse of the historic buildings —with better long- term design for the downtown." The City of Knoxville issued a request for proposals in September (posted at www.cityofknoxville.org) and has already received inquiries from six developers interested in taking on the project. Plan to buy your tickets and popcorn —and possibly stroll around a re -energized downtown Knoxville —in fall 2006. KeniRubman, Forwn News editor, tom -- piled information provided by Kn ox Her- itageandabo interviewed Kn ox Heritage Executive Director IGm Trent. For more inf mwtion visitwwwknoxheritage.orgor contactinfo@knoxheritage.org. B. E. R... D. E. .C. E.M. B. E . R .2 .o .0 9 state/local news NATIONAL UPDATE: MAIN STREET PROGRAMS Utah Main Street, the Utah Heritage Foundation, and Zions Bank have initiated a collaborative loan program for commercial building rehabilitation. In the fund's initial phase, approximately $300,000 in low -interest, preferred -term loans will be made available for qualifying projects in Utah Main Street partner communities. For information contact Bim Oliver, Utah Main Street Coordinator, at boliver@utah.gov. Boston Main Streets, the nation's first citywide Main Street coordinating program, continues to be ahead of the curve. Coinciding with its 10 -year anniversary, the program has created The Boston Main Streets Foundation to obtain alternative funding from foundations and corporations that can be distributed among Boston's Main Street districts. Learn more from Emily Haber, BMS coordinator, at MainStreets@cityofboston.gov. After being completely eliminated in 2002, California Main Street is recovering. In 2004 legislation moved Main Street to the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). Work is underway to establish necessary state regulations for program implementation and to obtain permanent funding and staffing. In the interim, a cooperative agreement between the OHP and the private California Main Street Alliance allows the program to perform basic functions. Contact Steade Craigo, FAIA, OHP senior restoration architect, at scrai@ohp.parks.ca.gov. The Pennsylvania Downtown Center has added a Regional Coordination Program component, which allows multiple smaller communities to pool their resources and participate in Main Street in cooperation with neighboring communities. Get details from Executive Director Bill Fontana, billfontana©padowntown.org. KANSAS A ceremony in August marked the transfer of 38 historic structures at the Dwight D. Eisenhower Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Leavenworth --once slated for demolition —to a private developer through a 75 -year enhanced -use lease. In 1999 the Department of Veterans Affairs made plans to raze the buildings in the National Register —listed Disabled Volunteer Soldier Historic District and use the land to expand the adjacent National Cemetery. This was actively opposed by the Preservation Association of Leavenworth, the Kansas SHPO, the Kansas Preservation Alliance, and the National Trust —which included the site on its 2000 list of 11 Most Endangered Historic Places —and represen- tatives from these groups were on hand for the ceremony. The campus of handsome red brick buildings dating from 1884 to the 1930s, and largely intact today, had housed disabled veterans. Through the Section 106 review process, the involved parties determined that the cemetery could be expanded on nearby land without affecting the historic structures. Using federal and state rehabilitation tax credits, Pioneer Group plans to adapt the buildings for a variety of uses including veterans' housing, small businesses, and classrooms. More information is posted at www.nationaltrust.org/news/docs/ 20050815_leavenworth.html. OKLAHOMA A bill signed into law in June expands the state rehabilitation tax credit program, making it exactly parallel to the federal program. Previously limited to historic hotels and newspaper plants, the 20 percent tax credit for historic buildings will now apply to all income -producing properties. The state also offers a 10 percent tax credit for older buildings that don't qualify as historic for the 20 percent credit. Taxpayers eligible for either federal tax credit will automatically qualify for the same amount of state tax credit without any additional paperwork or review. Rules for the program will be worked out this fall and presented by the SHPO at a workshop in December. Taxpayers will be able to claim the credit on their 2006 tax return. For more information contact Melvena Heisch, deputy state historic preservation officer, Oklahoma State Historic Preservation Office, (405) 522.4484. STATEWIDE/LOCAL PARTNERS Two coral regions —the Central Kentucky Heartlands and the Arkansas Delta —were recently selected as pilots in the National Trust's new Rural Heritage Development Initiative, funded through a grant from the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. This initiative will assist the regions with preservation -based economic development strategies that include heritage tourism, barn and farm preservation, local product and entrepreneurship development, and rural land policy. Lead organizations on the Kentucky project are Preservation Kentucky, Inc., and the Kentucky Heritage Council. In Arkansas they are Main Street Arkansas, Arkansas Delta Byways, and the Historic Preservation Alliance of Arkansas. ®. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F. o. R. U. .. . . N. E. .. .5. "u pfrJ NATIONAL TRUST j U. 'M*I - ■ i HISTORIC PRESERVATION t . 4 FORUM k�� crs Th Nov e' a ,. 7...°'.,a�'4J......iss:L£.3LN'xv.�.. rs., .. ._ A Public Policy Report published by National Trust Forum, a program of the Centex for Preservation Leadership , State Tax Credits for Historic Preservation .......................................................... 6yHarryKSrhuxtm By 2005 roughly half the states in the country had adopted laws creating credits against state taxes to provide incentives for the appropriate rehabilitation of historic buildings. In most cases these tax credits take the form of the very successful federal income tax credit for historic rehabilitation contained in Section 47 of the Inter- nal Revenue Code. Although the tax credits vary from state to state, most programs include the following basic elements: • Criteria establishing what buildings qualify for the credit. • Standards to ensure that the rehabilitation preserves the historic and architectural character of the building. • A method for calculating the value of the credit awarded, reflected as a percentage of the amount expended on that portion of the rehabili- tation work that is approved as a certified rehabilitation. • A minimum amount, or threshold, required to be invested in the rehabilitation. • A mechanism for administering the program, generally involv- ing the state historic preservation office and, in some cases, the state department of revenue. Why Some State Credits Work Better Than Others Not all state tax credit programs are created equal. Some state programs have been extraordinarily productive in stimulating rehabili- tation activity. Many others have produced mixed or minimal results. What causes these programs to fall short? In general, two factors greatly influence the effectiveness of the state historic tax credits: a limit or cap on the amount of credit and a lack of transferability. AnnualAggregate Caps A well -thought-out and skillfully drafted tax incentive for historic preservation cannot achieve its objectives if the amount of credits that can be awarded annually is subject to a statutory limit, particularly if the limit is fixed at a low figure. For example, Iowa has a 25 percent credit, but only a $2.4 million annual cap. Delaware has a 20 percent credit for commercial buildings and a 30 percent credit for owner - occupied residences, but only a $5 million annual cap. Indiana has annual aggregate caps of just $450,000 for commercial projects and $250,000 for residential projects. Even if the annual limit is relatively high, the very act of imposing a cap alters the nature of the program and can produce a perverse result, rewarding projects that do not require an incentive while excluding projects that cannot proceed without the state incentive. Maryland law sets a limit of $30 million in commercial credits per year, subject to annual appropriation. Applicants must compete for available funds, and individual jurisdictions are subject to sub -limits. Consequently, despite the relatively high overall cap, sponsors of Scientific Properties, LLC used state and federal hiswric rehab tax ora its to rehabih'tate a formerautogamgeintostate-o -the-anlabspaceforemngingbiauch businesses in Durham, NC The Tdangle Biotechnology Centerahooflns hands-on edueationalopponunitiesforarea duad=t&ged youth. Photo byAndrem Rothschild smaller and more marginal projects, particularly in Baltimore City, tend to be discouraged from participating in the program because of the lack of certainty of outcome, the cost of preparing a competitive application that may nevertheless be unsuccessful, and the difficul- ties of keeping financing commitments in place during the evalua- tion process, among others. Individual Project Capping Although limits on the amount of credits that can be awarded to an individual project are common and acceptable when the credit is sought for the rehabilitation of an owner -occupied single family residence, when low limits are fixed on commercial projects, they effectively defeat the desired incentive. Colorado law, for example, limits the amount of tax credits that may be awarded to a single project to $50,000, While this does not impair the credit's usefulness for homeownership rehabilitation, it is far too low a figure to affect decisions regarding substantial commercial projects. Transferability A state tax credit has value only to the extent that the credit holder has sufficient liability for state taxes that the credit can be used to offset. Although state tax rates vary, they are far lower than federal income tax rates. As a consequence, an apparently valuable state tax credit may wind up in the hands of a party unable to use it. There are several remedies to solve this problem, but many state statutes do not provide for them. Continued Patriot PlaceApartments, LLC, used state and frdemlhistoric rehab tax cirdas and fundingfrom the National TnutLoanFundr to rehabilitatea fire -ravaged apartment building in the HarryS. Truman National Huton cLandmark district in Independence, Mo. Theprojectproduced 17apartmentunit,, including 10 rerervedforlow- to moderate -income renters. Photo by Lisa Weisman. What Makes a State Tax Credit "Good?" A successful state tax credit program will contain the following com- ponents: Eligible Buildings The scope of eligible buildings should include: 1. buildings individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places, 2. buildings located in historic districts listed in the National Reg- ister that contribute to the historic character of the district, 3. individual buildings that have been locally designated as land- marks, and 4• buildings located in local historic districts that contribute to the historic character of the district. Standards far Rehabilitation The state should adopt the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, as interpreted by the state historic preservation officer. Availability for Homeowners The credit should be available for owner -occupied residences as well as commercial property. This is particularly important because there is no federal credit for owner -occupied residences. Appropriate Rates The percentage rate of the credit should be fixed at a level high enough to constitute a meaningful incentive, typically in the range of 20 percent to 30 percent of qualified rehabilitation expenditures. Rates that are significantly lower don't provide enough incentive to make a difference in a developer's decision to undertake a historic preservation project. As a negative example, Michigan provides a 25 percent tax credit for the rehabilitation of commercial structures, but reduces its credit to 5 percent when the federal 20 percent credit is used. Since the federal credit is almost universally used in commercial projects, the effective rate in Michigan is 5 percent. Transferability As mentioned earlier, there needs to be a workable mechanism to put the credit in the hands of the party that can use it. States have solved this problem in one or more ways 1. The tax code may permit the party that earns the credit to sell it outright to a third party with adequate tax liability to use it. For exam- ple, Rhode Island and Missouri permit the taxpayer to sell or convey the tax credits. 2. The code may permit a partnership that owns the property to make a disproportionate distribution of the credit, so that a local tax- payer can acquire the state tax credit while a national corporation not doing business in the state acquires the federal tax credit. Virginia, Kansas, and Delaware, for example, allow the credit to be passed through or allocated to partners or shareholders. 3. The code may allow a tax credit not fully usable in the current year to be carried back to offset taxes previously paid for prior tax years. This provision appears to be unique among the states to Missouri, although it is a feature of the federal program. 4. The tax credit may be refundable, so that any amount not used to offset current -year taxes is paid in cash to the holder of the credit. Since homeowners earning credits are effectively precluded from using the more complex techniques for transferring credits, the most practical solutions for them are to allow the unused credit to be either refunded or sold outright. Only Maryland provides for a fully refund- able tax credit, which is of particular value to lower -income home- owners. The Iowa statute provides for partial refundability. AnnualAggregate Caps Although state legislatures and their fiscal analysts prefer to keep a tight grip on the award of tax credits, those states that have resisted capping have had an economic advantage in attracting capital for historic preservation. For more information about state tax credits for historic preservation and a list of useful state contacts, visit www.nationaltrust.org/help/ taxincentives.pdf. HanyK Sc{nuartzira consultant to the National Trust on state tax incentives. Property owners in Virginia can take advantage ofa25perrent.uatetaxcreditforrehabbing aNational ornate tegisterpropenp Pictured above is2114FiutMainSheetin the Shockoe Valley and Tobacco RowHutoricDirtrictlocated in Richnona Ya. Photo courtesy ofthe V rginia Department ofHstori• Resources. ® . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .D. .E .. . . ... .. .A. .T. .E . . .. ... .t. ... .C. ... .E .. State Tax Incentives Are a Proven Economic Development Tool Rhode Island enacted a state historic preservation tax credit in 2002. Owners of historic commercial prop- erties can earn state income tax credits equal to 30 percent of qualified rehabilitation expenditures. A recent study, commissioned by Grow Smart Rhode Island, has shown that the state tax incen[ive is returning historic properties to municipal tax rolls, generating employment and housing where they are most needed, and leveraging substantial private investment. The study concludes that the state multi- year investment in the tax credit, estimated at $145 million, is generating a total of $795 million in eco- nomic activity. The program is estimated to add $242 million to the tax base of local communities and to generate on a present value basis $179 million in additional property tax revenue and $42 million in sales and income tax revenue. N 0 V E M B E R / D E C E M B E R 2 0 0 5 20% credit for rehab of income -producing properties for those properties that are eligible for the federal tax credit. Eligible Maine Historic Preservation properties: National Register or National Register eligible. Uses DOI standards for rehabilitation and qualified costs. Minimum expenditures: investment in excess of the adjusted basis of the building or $5,000 during taxable year, whichever is greatest. 207 -Commission -2132 wwwstale.me.us/mhpc www stateme Cap: $100,000/year, per taxpayer. Compliance period: 5 years with pro rata recapture. Useable by owner or lessee. } r Anlrual appropriation required foj,4ol mercial credit program 9 pefltNa award process administered by SHPO similar to grant program requires preference fof-ggRgraphic distribution of oretlits' Not piorie than 50% of funds available in any year may go to 13altlmore-Cityor anycounty. Ekedit rate is 20% of quaiified 7ehab expenditures. Commercial project cap;of $3 million in MaMand Historical Trust d } credits Governor required to mcfhde in budget $20 million fol' O0$, and $30 million for 2007 and 2008, but legislature not 7600 L,N,w.marylandhlstoricaltrust.net 'regijjred to appropriate funds fur_D'pltimercial projects. 20% tax credI ford neroccupied residences not subject to annual aggregate oap, but subject to cap of $50,000 in credits pet p'roj et Legislative appropriation not required for homeownership program, and no competitive award process. All credits fully refundable 20% credit for eligible income -producing properties. $10 million annual cap. DOI standards apply. Carry forward: 5 years. Massachusetts Historical Commission 617-7278470 December 2009 sunset for entire program. wwwswte.ma.us/sec/mhc 25% buildings. Reduces to5%when federal. Michigan Historical Center r = credltfor qualified rehab ofihistoric commercial and oWnproccupied residential 20%credit is claimed for comm@rcial properties. Eligibility: Natrpltal state; or local designated properties. 001 standards apply. 5173731630 -r jinldtum expenditures: 10%0f prdperty's value. 5 year recaptUre Rerlod `Carrryforward: l0 years. michigan.gov/hal/e,1607,7-160 1744519273 19319-OO.himl = 25% rehab credit for commercial or owner -occupied residential properties listed in National Register or in a certified historic Missouri Historic Preservation district. Costs must exceed 50% of the adjusted basis of the structure and the rehab work must meet DOI standards. Carry Program back: 3 years. Carry forward: 10years. No cap. P 576751mo59 . www.dncmo.gov/shpo/homepage.htm c rc f , Pr fhcome-prgducing certified histoAb#operties automatically 9¢ sthte.tax credit if the property qualifies for the 20% Montana State Historic Office t� ,rtroel,r , - federal credit. Carry forward 7 years,' , = . 406444-7715 rata - 1 www.his.state.mt.us 50% of rehab costs of up to $25,000 per project. Commercial, owner -occupied and rental residential, and archeological New Mexico Historic Preservation lco qualify. Tenants with 5 -year leases may also qualify. Minimum investment: none. State register properties qualify. Carry Division forward: 4 years. DOI standards apply. Pre -approval required. 5058276320 www.museums.state.nm.us/hpd 0 'ch@`fot historic homeofvri s,abd 2046 f9rjncome-prodtj i�j'¢�o Rers Mlnir[jum investment for 30% credit: -North Carolina Historic Preservation $ 9b?; 0%cornmeYgial dreditG n he pIg(Tybaeked on fL8et$ 8-b ttof20% prdv ding total of 40%. State credit must` Office be taken In equal annual IhstalfiSntsover 5 to:10 years 919-7334763 '�*p .k✓c _ i www.hpo.dedslatenc.us kota- A credit of 25% of an investment is allowed for the preservation and renovation of eligible historic property that is part of a State Kishodcai SocietyolNorth Dakota 2666 Renaissance Zone Project made between 01/01/00 and 12/31/04. Project cap of $250,000. Carry forward: 5 years. 701-328 www.stateod.us/hist n. . two 09filncepltaKeteditforallelig�$commerciffand resldg6fl+al fgpegp—aTfyfoM'ard:;l0years.Freelytransferablaatany' fhiefart9 {ollown%4he>1ea Effective Janu 2b0 ' Oldahomestate Historic Preservation tic -- y" rs of quaU Gatidt, 8-,' ��? 405-522-4484 ;- .. ?.. a . ,. k3.s •. m .akfifstorymus.okus 30% credit for income -producing projects. Minimum investment must exceed 50% of adjusted basis of structure. No yearly Rhode Island Historic Preservation cap, and no project cap. Freely transferable. Carry forward: 10 years. 20% credit for owner -occupied residential. Minimum & Heritage Commission !arid: Investment: $2,000. Maximum credit allowable per year: $2,000. Unused credits may be carried forward as long as property 401-222-2678 maintained. Interior work ineligible. State register properties qualify. www.preservauon.ri.gov Ij5L rt{eproSjuCing properties fhaY3 `Cxl3lve feddral redit and e41ig11541jg<td credit. Changes in 2005 allow banks to be. i-alarihallnstallments t'* vt f�- 20%. Residential owner -occupied and non -owner -occupied. Cap: none. Minimum investment: $10,000 over 3 years. DOI Utah State Historical Society 801-533-3500 standards apply. No fees. wam.histoiy.utah.gov/histoncpreserva- lion/historicpreservation.himl -. %$tecYedRih designated do),Fmtpwn afeas to projects alrea ,gftl1e 20% federal credit. 25%state credit available' Vermont Division for Historic f�t19j��s that do not tax g edit upto $2$'0 j Tiid eyed [ can also be used 8-S d mortgage credit - `` 20¢4 " Preservation 802828-3211 8-e fi of ftlnPyilla ecenters-< 5`%credifc nkl@cou for hfstonc and 8-i g a pfeh vpt�j,paJ[ea 1,000000 state cap In horkhGstdNc pgoiects x lwvwhistodcvermoid.org :, 25% for commercial and owner -occupied residential properties. Reconstruction and improvements must amount to at least 25% Virginia DeparMent of Historic Resource2 of the assessed value for owner -occupied buildings and at least 50% for non -owner -occupied buildings. Carry over: 10 years. 804-367-2323 National and state register properties eligible. DOI standards apply. No caps. State credit may be split off and sold separately. I www.dhr.state.va.us x'20%oredltfgr Ijnvate restdentlal�sdctures Merlin the Nati{sifafRttglstej81;0%Preditfor rental residential and income- West Virginia Historic Preservation IJ omce , i�gd4cJnfltttUotUres eligiplefortfie fe eml crealt propertie ,r us e'�1,�`.IhlRational, state, or local registers. DCI 304-558-0220d�₹ta'rds,apply Minimum e7ipgrt- tvre is 20% Of the prope7tysbasls ^fir fotyvard: 5 years. No caps. - www.vrvculmre owshpo/mdex.hvnf - y 25% credit for owner -occupied residential properties. Per -project cap: $10,000. Minimum investment: $10,000 over 2 years; State Historical society of Wisconsin wlabp in extendable to 5 years. Also a 5% credit for commercial properties, not subject to caps. Can be coupled with federal 20%credit. 608-264-6500 w ..shsw.wise.edu/about/ M1,} Minimum investment: expenses equal to building's adjusted basis. mdex.htmi 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .E. .t. . . .3 . . . . .. ... . . .P. .0. .. ... . E . kvorth knowing The National Trust's Gulf Coast Recovery Blog pro- vides news, resources, and personal accounts of Hurricane Katrina's impact on the Gulf Coast region. Visit www,nationaltrustfor historicpreservation.blogspot.com. The June 2005 Supreme Court decision in the case of Kelo v. New London has caused quite a stir in communities across the country. The Court allowed the City of New London to use its right of eminent domain to seize waterfront properties from local residents for a private development project expected to bring jobs and tax revenues to the economically distressed city. National Trust Vice President and General Counsel Paul Edmondson has written a thoughtful discussion of the context and significance of this ruling for preservation, posted at www.nationaltnrst.org/law/ldf.html. CommunityLots a new website from the Lincoln Institute of Land 'Policy, posts discussion forums, announce- ments and events, and a resource library on four topics: Brown- fields/Abandoned Lots Redevelopment, Universities and Neigh- borhoods, Community Land Trusts, and Toolbox (Geographic Information System, Negotiating and Mediation Skills). Check it out at www.communitylots.org. Working Windows, Revised and Updated Edition, by Terry Meany, provides detailed, illustrated instructions and tricks of the trade for disassembling and repairing all sorts of wood windows; cleaning and restoring hardware; stripping, refinishing, and painting; eliminating drafts and rattles; and more. 256 pages; $14.95 plus s&h. Order from www.globepequot.com (use "search" feature to locate). The Preserve America Community Neighborhood program is a new component of the Preserve America White House initiative, established to recognize neighborhoods in metro- politan areas with populations greater than 200,000 persons. Like the Preserve America Community program, which has designated 261 communities since January 2004, it will honor neighborhoods that protect and celebrate their heritage, use their historic assets for economic development and community revitalization, and encour- age people to experience and appreciate local historic resources through education and heritage tourism programs. The next quar- terly application deadline is December 1. For information go to www.PreserveAmerica.gov/communities.html. Preservation Brief 43: The Preparation and Use of Historic Structure Reports is one of the latest entries in the Preservation Briefs series, produced by the National Park Service's Technical Preservation Services. To download it and others for free, or to order a print copy for $2.75, log onto www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps. The Funders' Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities offers numerous resources for smart growth advocates. Check out Communicating Smart Growth, prepared by ActionMedia, which gives recommendations for advocacy communications based on research on public attitudes and values, and testing of specific approaches (August 2004, 24 pages). Also see Leading the Field, Volume 2: Profiles of Community Foundation Lead- ership in Building Better Communities, which provides case studies of more than two dozen community foundations, plus advice and action steps for similar groups (2004, 82 pages). Download them for free from www.fundersnetwork.org. (continued on page 7) newsmakers The National Trust has hired Lou Linden to coordinate its archi- Elizabeth Szufnar has been promoted to assistant director of the tectural assessment teams, mobilized to evaluate hurricane damage National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, from to historic resources in the Gulf Coast. A consultant and former director of communications and state services. director of the Constellation Foundation, he has done significant on -the -ground disaster relief work in Galveston and Honduras. The new executive director of the League of Historic American Theatres is Fran Holden. Her extensive experience in arts management includes serving as executive director of the Colorado Council on the Arts and director of professional development for the Association of Performing Arts Presenters. Fran Holden With the National Trust from 1978 to 1998, including as a co- founder of the Main Street program, Scott Gerloff returns as director of National Trust Tours. Most recently, he headed Historic Connections, consulting on heritage tourism, earned income, and organizational development. Henry McCartney, long-time executive director of the Landmark Society of Western New York Inc., will be leaving at the end of the year. He joined the organization in 1984 after serving as director of Neighborhood Conservation for the National Trust, The National Trust Northeast Office has said goodbye to Marilyn Fenollosa, senior program officer/regional attorney, who left to pur- sue other interests, and Field Representative Jenny Warren, who is relocating to Charleston, S.C. Last spring, Lisa Weissman left as field representative for the Midwest Office to relocate to New York. Robert H. Kuehn, Jr., National Trust Advisor for Massachusetts and vice chair of the statewide Community Preservation Coalition, has received that group's first "Outstanding CPA Leadership Award" for his work to promote the Community Preservation Act, an innovative funding mechanism for historic preservation, affordable housing, and land conservation. .C'EM E.E.R Z.o .O. 9. BRAC 2005 continued from page 2 from previous closures. A base closure can actually be an eco- nomic opportunity, especially when all elements of a commu- nity work together." On the positive side, it can offer com- munities the chance to diversify the local economy, to expand the state and local tax base by bringing in private enterprises that employ local residents, and to make distinctive buildings and prime locations (such as downtown areas or waterfronts) available for public uses or private development. Read about some successful turnarounds in Economic Transi- don of BRAC Sites, available on the OEA website. Preparing for a Base Closure If a military installation in your community might be targeted for closure or a major change, Sullivan advises the interested parties to take action early. The military installation needs to have an inventory of its his- toric properties ready, and stakeholders should start their discussions early, to work out a plan for the historic properties and a timeline for going Fort Sheridan, Ill., on the shores of Lake Michigan, 25 miles north of Chicago, was listed for closure in the 1988 BRAC round and closed in 1993 after a 106 -year military mission. The Fort Sheridan National Historic Landmark District fea- tures buildings by the prominent Chicago architects Holabird and Roche, and pioneering "prairie style" landscape design by Ossian C. Simonds. Now these surplus resources are back in use as part of the new residential Town of Fort Sheri- dan, touted by the developer as the first new community on the North Shore in 100 years. Of the 714 acres at the base, 114 acres were retained by the Army for Army Reserve missions and 185 were purchased by the Navy for military housing and offices. Of 415 acres iden- tified as surplus property for disposal by the Army, 290 acres were transferred to the Lake County Forest Preserve District at no cost, and the rest, which includes most of the Historic Landmark District, was sold to the Fort Sheridan Joint Plan- ning Committee (JPC), which functioned as the redevelop- ment authority for Fort Sheridan. In 1996 the JPC sold its land to the Master Development Team it had selected, the Town of Fort Sheridan Company. Its plan for 551 homes, townhouses, and condominiums skillfully combines adaptive use of historic structures with compatible new construction. The new Town of Fort Sheridan aims for a village atmosphere and offers access to the fort's old golf course, a lakeside beach, and preserved woodlands —all within commuting distance of Chicago. Many of the adaptive use projects qualified. for federal historic reha- bilitation tax credits or a property tax assessment freeze for the rehabilitation of historic properties. For more information visit www.fortsheridan.com. through the required Section 106 review for their reuse. "I really encourage preservation advocates to reach out to those Local Redevelopment Author- ities," she stresses. "On the local level, they're the key entrance into the process." Contact information for the LRAs will be available on the OEA website. LRAs will be listed following the approval of a closure or realignment action and the LRA's recognition by OEA, starting late this year. The OEA recommends that local leaders seek advice from communities that have survived a base closure. Its web - site provides contact informa- tion for such communities and links to the websites of closed bases. Another resource is the National Association of Instal- lation Developers/An Associa- tion of Defense Communities (NAID/ADC), an organization of community economic devel- opment entities, companies, organizations, and local, state, and federal agencies concerned with the economic develop- ment, conversion, and reuse of military properties, on both closed and active military bases. Its website is www.naid.org. For More Information The following websites provide a wealth of infonnationand links to additional resources: DoD BRAC Cultural Resources Work Group: www.denix.osd.mil/CR-BRAC; DoD Office of Economic Adjust- ment: wwwoea.gov; DOD BRAG: www.dod.mil/brac. Or contact Maureen Sullivan, DoD federal preservation officer, at (703) 604- 0519, Maureen.Sullivan@osd.mil. Sign4canthe(p was provided by Maureen Sullivan andbyBrianMichaelLione, cul- mad rescuing DoD Legacy Resourre ManagementPmgram STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT, AND CIRCULATION 1) Publication title: Forum News 2) Publication No.: 013-083 3) Date of filing: October 1, 2005 4) Issue frequency: Bimonthly 5) No. of issues published annually: 6 6) Annual subscription price: $115 7) Complete mailing address of known office of publication: National Trost for Historic Preservation, 1785 Massa- chusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20036 8) Complete mailing address of head- quarters or general business office of publisher: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20036 9) Full names and addresses of publisher, editor, and managing editor: Publisher: National Twat for Historic Preserva- too, 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20036; Editor: Elizabeth Byrd Wood, same address 10) Owner: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20036 11) Known bondholders: None 12) The purpose, function, and nonprofit status of this organization and the exempt status for federal income tax purposes: has not changed during the preceding 12 months 13) Publication name: Forum News 14) Issue date for circulation dam below: November/December 2005 15) Extent and nature of circulation: Average no. copies each issue during preceding l2 months: 4;370. Actual no. copies of single issue published nearest to filing date: 4,081 b. Paid and/or requested circulation (1) sales through dealers and carriers, street vendors, and counter sales: 0;0. (2) Paid or requested mail subscriptions: 3,600; 3,641 C. Total paid and/or requestedcirculation: 3,600; 3,641 d. Free distribution by mail: 0; 0 e. Free distribution outside the mail:352; 240 E Total free distribution: 352; 240 g. Total distribution: 3,952; 3,881 h. Copies not distributed: (1) Office use, leftovers, spoiled: 454; 240 (2) Return from news agent: 0; 0 i. Total: 4,406; 4,081 Percent paid and/or requested circulation: 82%; 89% 16) This statement of ownership will he printed in the November/December 2005 issue of this publication l7) t certify that all information furnished above is true and complete. Reed Beebe, Business Manager BECOME A PRESERVATION E -ADVOCATE Join the National Trust's Preservation E-mail Network today! It's a great Way to stay informed about public policy issues involving preservation at the local, state, and federal levels. You will receive Preservation Advocate News, a free monthly newsletter that provides an in-depth look at the public policy issues, and alerts to mobilize the network to participate in,.,a. preservation campaigns on spedPtc issues SIGN UP`TODAY!E' visit http://tdDw'ii.com/nlhp2/mlm/,a ti YOU CAN dearAnn Pamela Q. Dear Ann Pamela, Cops, I did it again and hit the delete button. Now I'm missing some of the postings I've saved from the Forum -L discussions. Several homeowners in our historic district want to install inappropriate vinyl siding and I seem to recall a discussion about siding in Forum -L. Is there an archive of Forum -L postings? Lost the Thread A. Dear Lost, There is indeed, and it's a font of information! When the manager of my country estate suggested using vinyl siding on some of the historic outbuildings, I used those very postings to set him straight! I simply logged onto Forum Online (http://forum.nationaltrust.org), went to the Research Tools section, then did a search of the Forum -L Archive using the words "vinyl siding." More than 150 postings came up! You'll need your usemame/expiration date and password to get onto Forum Online. If you can't remember your password, just send an e-mail to fomm@nthp.org. Sincerely, Ann Pamela Note: Ann Pamela Cunningham, as many of you know, led the way to pre- rerve Mount Vernon back in 1856, and so we've borrowed her name as pur advice columnist to clarify your Forum membership questions. ml Property Protection do, Fla. COsponsoredby idi and Response, Inter- -uritv..Contact 800.257 - al Meeting, Philadel- nce, Miami. Sponsored ;ontact Sarah Corpuz, r, www.novoco.com/ Arts and Humanities, ouncil for Education, 0,niversity, University Urban Development. 5oidiiiator, 1.808.949 - erence, Denver. Co- ySsion, Penn State U. mkwarren@lgc.org, worth knowing (continuedfmmpage 5) ................................ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation closed its Lakewood, Colo., field office and reallocated resources to its headquarters in Washington, D.C., as of October 28. The National Park Service's National Center for Preservation Technology and Training has produced a catalog with a partial listing of its publications and other products. Topics include archeology and collections, architecture and engi- neering, materials research, landscape architecture, information technology, preservation education, and historic sites research, as well as back issues of NCPTT Notes. NCPTT products are free, with a limit of five per order. A PDF of the catalog can be down- loaded from www.ncptt.nps.gov. Tribal Consultation: Best Practices in Historic Preserva- tion is a new report from the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers designed to help federal agencies and tribes in their consultations regarding the identification and treatment of places of traditional religious and cultural signifi- cance. The best practices and model protocols are based on exten- sive surveys of agencies and tribes about their own consultation experiences. Download the 69 -page study from www.nathpo.org. N O V E NI B ../•D E C E M B. E . R.. 2 . 0 .0• .5 . . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 'hut there The National Trust Responds to Hurricane Katrina "This year's conference theme 'Sustain America —Vision, Economics, and Preservation,' is even more meaningful in light of the recent tragedy in the Gulf Coast region, where scores of historic homes and sites have been damaged by Hurricane Katrina," said National Trust President Richard Moe at the start of the 2005 National Preservation Conference in Portland, Ore. "We all know that Katrina is one of the greatest human tragedies in the nation's his- tory —but it also could be the greatest cultural catastrophe America has ever experienced. For this reason it is imperative that preservationists from across the world come together as a collective group to insure that residents come back home to healthy, vibrant, livable places that retain the historic charac- ter that makes them unique. Rebuilding is essential, but it must acknowledge the unique heritage of one of the nation's FORUM ` R e NATIONAL TRUST hkHISTORIO PRESERVATION.. 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 MMI most distinctive regions." The National Trust recently launched the National Trust Hurricane Recovery Fund, with the goal of raising one million dollars to support the work of survey teams, help convene dis- cussions among experts to envi- sion design solutions for sensi- tive reconstruction, and facilitate the provision of tech- nical assistance to communities in need. To date, the Trust has raised more than $400,000 with generous contributions from the World Monuments Fund and American Express Foundation; the Getty Foundation; Home and Garden Television (HGTV); The History Chan- nel; Restore Media, Inc.; and hundreds of National Trust members across the nation. During the conference the National Trust also launched an effort to raise additional funds with an initial $10,000 commit- ment, to benefit the Mississippi Heritage Trust and the Preserva- tion Resource Center of New Orleans as well as the National Trust Hurricane Recovery Fund. Currently the Trust is work- ing with partners in three pri- mary areas: • Assembling survey teams with professional expertise in architecture, construction, his- tory, and preservation. Teams are now at work in Mississippi assessing damage to historic resources and trying to prevent unnecessary demolitions. • Working with federal, state, and local governments to develop and refine tools to facilitate reconstruction and help prevent future disasters of this kind. At the federal level, these include: amendments to facilitate the use of existing tax - credit incentives for the reha- bilitation of hurricane -damaged historic commercial properties; development of a new tax - credit program for the rehabili- tation of owner -occupied his- toric houses; and the creation of a two-year, $60 million fund that would offer grants to help preserve properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. At the state and local levels, tools being considered include revised building codes to enable structures to with- stand future hurricanes, and design guidelines to encourage new construction that respects the character of historic areas. • Launching a major effort to educate the public about the importance of the historic resources of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast —and the impor- tance of saving them. The National Trust has opened offices in both New Orleans and Mississippi to provide on -the - ground assistance and education. For more information about the National Trust Hurri- cane Katrina Recovery Fund, and ways that individuals and organizations can aid recovery efforts, visit www.national- trust.org or call 1.800.944.6847 (NTHP). - H WASHINGTON COUNTY ;Y" H,NG DEPT; A4hAA%%ryd%h#hA#hA%rth%rtRAk Adhdddrthrth#hhh 3 -DIGIT 217 38613543 s42 P2 WASHINGTON COUNTY HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 100 W WASHINGTON ST STE 320 HAGERSTOWN MD 21740-4748 I;tl;lt;tIII'ttItIltlllt;;Ilttlltttl;l;,IlttI'Itlttllltltl Periodicals Postage Paid Washington, DC ftLL./sa N ' J ie�<rvc ifr1wf7 w/1-- I-3 5 - Shop C G0O 3 N m Sn n t 0 R Joins Map 25 ® ALE%ANDR(A DRAFTING Co. 25 774500" MD GRID 590.000 FT Copy I ,4III5 / - ---�p�✓ t WA-I-382 District 26 MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST crap 56 Parcel 263 MAGI # 2205895535 INVENTORY FORM FOR STATE HISTORIC SITES SURVEY HISTORIC AND/OR COMMON Charlton Farm ®LOCATION STREET& NUMBER Bower Road, south of I-70 CITY.TOWN - - - CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICY - X •...,,.„v„c Williamsnort 6 STATE - •_-- - - - COUNTY Maryland Washington slCLASSIFI CATI ON CATEGORY • OWNERSHIP STATUS PRESENTUSE -DISTRICT _PUBLIC - X -OCCUPIED 7_AGRICULTURE _MUSEUM XBOILDINGISI. - It PRIVATE -UNOCCUPIED -COMMERCIAL PARK X RESIDENCE _STRUCTURE' _BOTH -WORK IN PROGRESS - -EDUCATIONAL' PRIVATE _SITE - PUBLIC ACQUISITION -�' ACCESSIBLE _ENTERTAINMENT .-RELIGIOUS -OBJECT -IN PROCESS - -YES: RESTRICTED - - -GOVERNMENT -SCIENTIFIC ._BEING CONSIDERED -YES: UNRESTRICTED -INDUSTRIAL -TRANSPORTATION X NO - -MILITARY -OTHER. FIOWNER OF PROPERTY NAME - . Albert B. Charlton Telephone # STREET & NUMBER Route_# 2 CITY. TOWN STATE Z1JJ code Williamsport _ VICINITY OF Maryland 21795 ®LOCATION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Liber #: 245 COURTHOUSE. Folio #: 190 REGISTRY OF DEEDS;ETC. - Washington County Court House STREET & NUMBER West Washington Street 21740 REPRESENTATION IN EXISTING SURVEYS TITLE -FEDERAL -STATE -COUNTY -LOCAL DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS CITY. TOWN ® DESCRIPTION CONDITION CHECK ONE CHECK ONE X EXCELLENT -DETERIORATED UNALTERED '{ ORIGINAL SITE _GOOD -RUINS X -ALTERED C 50% -MOVED DATE _FAIR -UNEXPOSED DESCRIBE THE PRESENT AND ORIGINAL (IF KNOWN) PHYSICAL APPEARANCE This farm complex is located on the west side of Bower Road, just south of 1-70 near Halfw: south of Hagerstown in Washington County, Maryland, The buildings are situated on level ground with the house and barn each facing east. The house is a two story, four bay brick structure resting on low fieldstone foundations0 one story, two bay wing is attached to the south gable end. At the front elevation of the wing the original overhang has been enclosed and a newer one story porch added which exten' along the front elevation of the entire structure. In the main section, bricks forming th• front wall are laid in Flemish bond, while those at the other elevations and the wing disp! American bonding with five courses of stretchers between header rows. Flat arches are pre above the openings. The front elevation and part of the south end wall have been painted Openings are aligned with each other in the walls. Windows have narrow casings and hold t over two pane double hung sashes. Several pairs of louvered shutters are retained. The m entrance is located in the second bay from the south end of the front elevation. The door trimmed similarly to the windows and includes a narrow transom. The porch extending acros the front of the house rests on a concrete slab base with partial brick piers supporting wooden• •posts. The house is roofed with sheet metal and has barge boards which are placed directly agains the end walls. Brick chimneys are located inside the gable elevations. Some distance southwest of the house is a frame bank barn with decorative metal ventilator cupolas. Small frame sheds and outbuildings are located between the house and barn. The buildings appear to be in excellent condition and stand on a tract containing 27.81 ac CONTINUE ON SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY MAJOR BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES CONTINUE ON SEPARATE SHEET If NECESSARY Di GEOGRAPHICAL DATA ACREAGE OF NOMINATED PROPERTY 27.81 acres VERBAL BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION LIST ALL STATES AND COUNTIES FOR PROPERTIES OVERLAPPING STATE OR COUNTY BOUNDARIES STATE COUNTY STATE ®FORM PREPARED BY NAME / TITLE Paula Stoner Consultant ORGANIZATION . unit Washington County Historical Sites Survey November 1977 STREET&NUMBER _ TELEPHONE County Office Building, 33 West Washington Street 791-3065 CITY OR TOWN STATE Hagerstown Maryland 21740 The Maryland Historic Sites Inventory was officially created by an Act of the Maryland Legislature, to be found in the Annotated Code of Maryland, Article 41, Section 181 KA, 1974 Supplement. The Survey and Inventory are being prepared for information and record purposes only and do not constitute any infringe- ment of individual property rights. RETURN TO: Maryland Historical Trust The Shaw House, 21 State Circle Annapolis, Maryland 21401 (301) 267-1438 Ps. 1101 ABSTRACT WA -I-382 Mid 19th Century Charlton Farm Williamsport Vicinity private This farmstead consists of a two story, four bay brick house with an attached kitchen. wing, a frame bank barn and various outbuildings. Together they represent a typical mid 19th cen- tury rural complex, wt imp Htd vq„ VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1 "=2000' II \ / � / � � �f, / I I 1 / / N/F / �' v v �� v RQ, TAtF.' �- - - FLOYD R. KLINE and/VIVIAN JEAN / V � / M KLINE V A O R/(� 70 I a � � � � v.-� �_A 3�5 - I L7n F 44 �_ �� n B �_ vz / �, O 2 `,30553 RS / / / / / -- a -- - -H , LAND ACQUIRED BY MARYLAN�\ \ \ / _ �� — OADS COMMISSION 8ER MS R C_ \ \ \ \ -.._- / ° _._- . , ,. STATE R, PLAT NUMBER 31582 .,., _ ._ - �._,.___ ^ �-� __- __ _ ___ _____._ � -_ _._ � '. EXTRA O --- --- -- _ --� 0.0 -� _ _ a 8 ' \ „ _ - O 0r 0:4A I i O a U x r B 1 " Z r r r T i C .D ' / \ \ ` \ ---- Q © i -1___ . - Q rU Q __ _..__d -- B PLAT NUMBER 30552 - -- d O \1 z � a t - G MH Ar1 1 16 —TAB / " © pD © _ T $± _ r r / r r+r = opF _ = i lMH P g - - oA - z E © i TIII � Z II / r i - r = XI'STING.1�'1IXF'E6 r CygEE _ _ - = _ I A E� OPE ' a W VoF\ N Q Z cV W J l � AREA a � ti � J 8 T z t SEWER J _ ©C= _ r�� O BRIDENDOLPH w� _ Z O � - _ 1 M _ L R Y MH i qpp ea �O C7 W 1 r _ _ r 3ER / Z © © _ RELOCATED X L(i Q Q r T O ® O / r- - EXISTIN i - - HOA OPE - �� ti II ---- - _ '- - ->< MH SPRING _ WAY i SPACE -. POLE CONK CTI�N ' , ( � PROPOSED - � E II � I- I--- MH-,- - 1 T07 LOT ,, EXI j�NG HOUSE / [ BUS STOP / $$ _ !!!! TO REMA = r i GS O u` I 1 , /;oa±.a�r l - -- --�- ' // , /riryoy MHI MH O - / / O MR I _� T N/F RODNEY L EBERSOLE P,347 TO / i KZN // / ® HOA ' - ------ 1 I BE PART OF PUO PROJECT N w w I MHDONALD T. MOWEN, SR. & BETTY W. MOWEN ,_-_. _ ___ = T . 4 - f. / II & DONALD T. MOWEN, JR. & CAROLYN D. --._ r z 4 T r_ r - T NAOo PRE -TEEN � ' _ _ RELOCATEj3 Y L N/F REMOVE _ _� � � _ _ _ � _ - fiOT LOT - i MOWEN - - - i - O / j O = POD /' NANCY R W. TRICH and EX HOUSE - -, -- _ _ _ - -\ - z EDWARD W. LAPOLE l # - y ® I - - _ L1630, F.441 � I LIBER 777, FOLIO 744 (PARCEL NO. i ) / © I © © © © © : Q EXISTING BARN, FARM — _ ` = _ 1 N/F o LU HOUSE AND OUT BUILDINGS j = \ f° I OSCAR ROBERT ANDREWS and p N/F / TO BE REMOVED. EXISTING --T ---- ---F—___ .= OPEN CHANNEL _ __--- --- --- ------ .i © r = _ _ = MADALYL 49, VIRGINIA63NDREWS u /: SPRINGWALLSTO USEAIND STONE „� I LATIMER; LLC ii / L1697, F.1010 / I ----- / _ _ EX. POE I I " I z O / r I �_LTO REMAIN DRAINAGE AREA _ - _ I I - �� — — — _ =87,36± AC. t FA p��rr f I, / / 1 o29±AC DONALD T. MOyiEN and ,� / / r _ _ �= I CAROLYND.MOWEN OSCAR R. ANDREWS and D 3 - I LIBER 2239, FO 10 218 P. 1072, rn MADALYN V. ANDREWS O N/F N/F I TO BE PART O PUD PROJECT _ a z DEBORAH A/POWELL, RONALD L. _ _ (REMOVEEX.]FRAILERAND 347, F.267 1 I DONALD L HAYS and a __ I STRUCTURES) I I I LL LI..I BENNETT/KEVIN D. BENNETT, GLORIA J. HAYS ? ` S TEPHANI M. BOONE and DEANA I o I TODD S. SCREEN I' I I / N F �I z / /M. DOUGLAS RONALD E. CLINE z Q L647, F.258 < ----____ 'I / L.2560, F.556 w SCR ENandMAR OTOP. 1' SERVICE j b WATER MH x / and LOIS A. CLINE- --- I O Z _ I w % 758 TO BE j / L627, F.174 I 4 PROJECT SERVICE I O PUD wit I - I I �� \ K ICE IVED ® TYP HOME OWNERS / :�� ASSOCIA71ON(HOA) I I OPEN AREA III I NOV 0 20 I' WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANK NC DEPT -_.____._____ SHEET..NO..__ _,._ _...,,..... s ATTN:: PAUL KOTSHER TING TOWS DRIVEEXIS�NG TERESA (COON 1OF2 FRED P K SECT 21701 , DRIVE (COUNTY ---- -_—_---- J s -v FREDERICK, MD. \ i ROAD 50' R/V1� !I 8 K : I PHONE. 410 980-9998 _. EX. POE;': I ROAD 50' R/W) TO BED;' CA I RELOCATED 03-05-0271 ,`7 >-Iw N N N N N N N N N; \ F LOYF) R. KLINE and ` VI41AN JEAN KLINE L 71 7, p.144 \ CURVE DATA CURVE RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT CHORD CHORD BRG DELTA C— 1 3969.72 779.80 391.16 778.54 56359'46"E 11'15'18" C— 2 3969.72 40.91 20.45 40.91 S7101'22"E 035'26" 8 RN \ �P °,\P TRACT A ~ 4 N coo P� �• S > 0 RyL aN0 ;,YVpr E 1 oN S�pVi / , g r G yq fR RO 9 /-s q�� oqpS NJ N '� 0FR ( j RpA' 0. .1 ° // � @00 , 2. oMFpwgO. kqr \....N. 04 v P - - Spy4 gsoV <r TEL N C 0 L 20DRAINAGE HASF PLAT EASEMENT fi aP/ UMBER 6207 0'1 \ Mg Wq 6 _ IV 51 82 a pQ /, Mb SS2 175 LOT 6 � � > o :�� r --: �y� ��� - oad 3 C L�� - I eh OSS3 ) , • m � C T e� -r �� TRACT A � -� Q °� DONALD T. MOWEN, SR. & BETTY W. �� p clrof /� Q' °F� MOWEN & DONALD T. MOWEN, JR.� NuyelchT a G• o02' ,y� L''1A\ \ & CAROLYN D. MOWEN a�gss � 1 £RS 3oF Wq 30• R '5;'/ LIBER 777, FOLIO 744 (PARCEL NO. 1) r P R f qRY 945,509 S.F.± OR 21.7059 AC.± %f•\g 30SS3RC, y� LOT E_ SeWf SgNiT e l� 8G, °" t� ' � dAT NU fM �4' , 6 M@ fNi � qS Gy � �� i 2pT fR �° DoT C'p� �O�Pt� LOT 'S a CD / �\ 4. N-S,APPROXIMATE 44 G`r ' \N, LOCATION OF E)ISPNO `�Y �\ SEPTIC AREA � 0° ,�& / ` 40/3D FENCE L�.` PERMANENT EASEMENT FOR ' /' ! -AST HELD "r '- MULTI STORY OUN ; OUTLET DITCH PER M.S.R.C. :� BRICK & FRAME PLAT NUMBER 30552 �6 I DWELLING #17003 LIBER 427, FOLIO 615 - _q Y K N 6�� BOFENCE LINE 55g� ry1� �i �£00/I .1GRAVEL DRIVE or C 6 " - CONCRETE b 0 �S>= i�-! \ WALKS Q Q S � 23 �. A Tar FFH_F \- A `�e A�' - _, GUY WIRE Q O /51 IL/JND CONCRFII a�, .'� ap (TYPICAL) ' AP. ° �Q AND CONOROU - -- 1D WA *ER TOUGHS A SPS ff. 3�2g 4 #H32694 - rb P= e O Q ae \y �AH�R FRAMF (PR/l, �1� o hQ�� ��3 wit -. _. aPRNG STONE WAiS '7 �` , '^S,. FRAME / -S O ��O i-�j7 nJQ h 12 A a- Dti HousE CONCRETEFOOT\ (qV M(, e N `4 N Y 1 �, G H A p RAEe- F7 / yF y 1GyT q L Q 2° m U, 63. �r4� ExlsnNc HAND ,,k37 pq T/p OF 3.°� 4, >? G" CONCRETE r<y DUG WELL WITHIN / `S99 �k Ap `SO N� W ° �� - O U g 9� CONCRETE METAL SHED 6S• 9 y Hq3j 2 Q O ^ cO� _A W _ W Wgo Bl OCK 20 Rv „ , BLOCK Sl • 2 �/O �le tp Q ' SHED �/ 1 STORY REB OS oNo ,fi021� N ' 42oo� ?�, r OpF ED ,;: DWELLNGM #1 023 EXISTING WELL ? \`� A.. _ 36� a \r °' � _ Q O o 8• SJ4 8/RCN SHED (SEE NOTE e F W �Wq v =Q' 22�` ��RZPER� L'°t t aoN TRACT B �/ r` �� co 216f n �2 oa RyE ROM OCATI0N OF EXISTING a qq A u o / Y 6�• Np APPROxIMATE M FT< co : DONALD T. MOWEN and N�- co�- SEPTIC AREA 2O ozw CAROLYN D. MOWEN � 4acR�o �'S 'Iqo7@� q �i2s, I / . WOOD FENCE AiT Q ^ V LIBER 2239, FOLIO 218 POST FOUND (c c / <� N /62• °'� �2 � 43,415 S.F.± OR 0.9967 AC.± -=fON AND HELD q pJo Rq�Arl. ' C /62•4J4 43 J4i O _ RE PINE �FR'5 / 4METq Te VK, �° >REes N / M SH c M ,4'11, (v .GJ / 2g3 gO, `� f "r+ D�1Lf F N RODNEY N/F ?34 51 „ W '? J iT� OPEN IRONS z �r`7 O O� 1 PIPE FouND a �T 11 ME u \ 252, EBF�'S O O pC 1 �`Sg 12AND HELD N APPROXIMAT �a ° S 15'q E57 OLe /�l/-/l/\�7/l((),' �'� �� h� 1 N��Q N/F LS J N FOR LNE ry m LOCATION OF F_XISTING L/% / Q �..QR L 70'76" ,1A _ '401Q/ puAREA � 0!v 'o. OO' NAN /' £6 ✓ YS On / S •20 W 724""t W 2034. ENCR FRAM N �pa D7WARD DEA 1l / Q � �Q N �258� YS d TQ� N 402.65 EE °Eral�ac/i z sap 4 0 OL o d O �,47 / O� ��Q�Q� / i , MgR13 JC RC EN Dry ME sHRs / / �2� ` 9 �4 MADA ROB RGl ANDRE \ ? 4 R d J� �A.F � L.2 Nrq IRS o F16,3NDREW,- Si11rVe oes Certification \ 1 / C,N0rNeRS k 6117p 0'" -, C, 2 L969 ,�Q o; d- U m it Y �k JII �aa 3wZ To Pasquinelli Management, LLLC, Portrait Homes Mid —Atlantic, LLC, and �\--/ R k sENCE 0NEW�� � R A/F 1 i Chicago Title Insurance Company. ONq N/F This is to certify that this map or plot and the survey on which it is based �- ' Qnd LODE r r 34� SAN Re ana were made in accordance with the "Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for \ I `62 /1 S A' C( � -a� `�� 26, WS I ALTA/ACSM Land Title Surveys" jointly established and adopted by ALTA, ACSM, \ , F /2a NE and NSPS in 1999, and includes items 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11(b), 13, 14, and OLIVES (TYPICAL) and - 16 of Table A thereof. Pursuant to the Accuracy Standards as adopted by ALTA, \ / LINES (TYPICAL) NSPS, and ACSM and in effect on the date of this certification, undersigned were certifies that the survey meas urements ents we a made in accor dance with the "Minimum Angle, Distance and Closure Requirements for Survey Measurements Which Control Land Boundaries for ALTA/ACSM Land Title Surveys". 70 �T/ate - ! -c3ea-- Date Robert B. Bush, Maryland RegistratM �Af�,, Title Notes: '%Z;At top.", The following exceptions were noted in Schedule B — Section 2 of ���°LTfle commitment and: A) Does not affect this site. 4) Restrictions imposed in the following deeds applicable to the property insured herein by scheme of development: a) deed dated May 14, 1959 by and between Clarence W. Suman and Agnes V. Suman and recorded in Liber 347, folio 266. b) deed doted May 14, 1959 by and between Oscar R. Andrews and Madalyn V. Andrews recorded in Liber 347, folio 267. c) deed dated January 19, 1960 by and between Clarence W. Suman and Agnes V. Suman recorded in Liber 355, folio 526. d) deed dated March 23, 1966 by and between Carl F. Banzhoff and June E. Banzhoff recorded in Liber 437, folio 771. e) deed dated July 18, 1969 by and between James A. Short, Sr. and Gladys E. Short recorded in Liber 492, folio 572. General Notes: 1) Reference is hereby made to a co nveyance ance from Albert B. Charlton unto Y Donald T. Mowen, Sr. and Betty W. Mowen and Donald T. Mowen, Jr. and Carolyn D. Mowen, by deed dated January 7, 1985 and recorded among the land records of Washington County, Maryland in Liber 777, at Folio 744. Reference is also hereby made to a conveyance from Mary Violet Charlton unto Donald T. Mowen and Carolyn D. Mowen, by deed dated January 16, 2004 and recorded among the aforesaid land records in Liber 2239, at Folio 218. 2) This site is zoned "A" — Agricultural. 3) M.B.S.L.'s (Minimum Building Setback Lines) per Washington County Zoning Ordinance: Front=40' Side=15' Rear=50' Height restriction: Except on farms or as provided in section 23.4, no building or structure shall exceed two and one half (2}) stories or thirty five (35) feet. 4) This site is not affected by the limits of 100 year flood plain as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Washington County, Maryland, panel number 240070 0090B, with a revised date of Septmebr 30, 1992. 5) For information concerning the "INCISED CHANNEL" shown hereon, refer to the Wetlands Report prepared by Triad Engineering, Inc.. Per the Washington County Subdivision Regulations, a stream Buffer will be required prior to development of the area. 6) Horizontal datum is assumed. Bearing system is based on a plot entitled, "Final Plat of Subdivision of Sterling Oaks — Phase III" and record among the land records of Washington County, Maryland as plat number 6207. 7) No subsurface investigation was performed by Cump/Triad Engineering, Inc.. Any underground utilities that may exist on these properties have not been located or shown hereon. The overhead utility lines shown hereon are based soley on above ground evidence found at the site. 8) According to statements made by Donald T. Mowen, Sr. to Cump/Triad Engineering, Inc. personel, the existing well on the lands of Donald T. Mowen and Carolyn D. Mowen, Liber 2239, Folio 218, also serves the multi story brick & frame dwelling on the lands of Donald T. Mowen, Sr. and Betty W. Mowen and Donald T. Mowen, Jr. and Carolyn D. Mowen, Liber 777, Folio 744. 9) Total area of this site = 22.7026 acres±. Symbols Legend OO IRON PIPE AND SURVEYOR'S CAP SET GUY WIRE ANCHOR co, UTILITY POLE -OHW- OVERHEAD WIRES (UTILITY LINES) -LICE- UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINES I AP. g265A NT FOR I I / MRS L.C. PLAT NUMPPORTING BERFOLIO 63 S 552 Ck" - ADJOINER'S LANSCAPED AREA ENCROACHES (SEE DETAIL #1) r- ADJOINER'S STONE & VINYL SIDED DWELLING #10616 GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 100 ft. ry I ' Il//fl LR/Q A. Ea/DO Lai slg Rtp9� 00, and ) i 10 0 149.86. Z ' ONg41) 3 Q eE�Y Mow a Nw h: MO EN,git N zr OgRo wEN ' & Cie WO $ IV, o�> a Mow 3W� 94$• 509 FRCE.L NO FN ' < N O W *OR 21.,05) 41121" W�� Q w 234 53. � Q � 2 j 3r W OA - C3 2.3' O �g z r?� ��W,.- Detail #1 Scale: 1 "=30' DONALD T. MOWEN and CAROLYN D. MOWEN LIBER 2239, FOLIO 218 43,415 S.F.± OR 0.9967 AC.± WOOD FENCE POST FOUND; rro RO`�NEY N/F N / � L.25/ EE 0RSCCE i PROM 1'Ro ER w00N0...--- ER NC A CONTIGUOUS PART OF FDWgRD A rRICN o DONALD T. MOWEN, SR. & /W. MOWEN &/J N OPEN 63D- F 44pOLE nd DONALD MOWEN JR. & ]Y :'� EASTRpF PROPERTyN�INE1' CAROLYN D. MOWEN I LIBER 777, FOLIO 744 f (PARCEL NO. 1) 945,509 S.F.± OR 21.7059 AC.± 5.0• N 0.50 MDOB FRAME SHED q q R�PC //F i/A DR WS E PROPERTYENCROACHES LINE 2a9, 07 63 ANDREI ySd j/-AP $H,2632 / £ RECOVER Detail #2 NOV 3 0 2005 Scale: 1"=30' ' WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING DEPT. CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT No. 1727COM z 0 F- a OS 0 Or w 0 a Z o 00 O Or II r y p w Q m ■ Z Z �Z — Or J } Qa Z ■■1 ti W N Q W -0 W W ZgU?z @ W O E U> L W W W °'* v CCo z_ 2 0~0 ... N Q co M C7 Z > r m J O Z O W Z E X WZ M LL a. m � '� Z N N- U)N- =�(7 > S M Qj W O O Z W WO Z W 32 0 o 3 0 Z w a > 3 `o a Id O IS o>.GOooa W uWV <fJrm (N �O 0 m 'C cc O 0O� )-.c C ra Jwp ~ tto o w� a.:J nz Z W; - C'Om w0 a ay ro r33?z WW�wwo ZN 033�3mz0I H o O w0 - a Q 0aj P _lCZ Cr Na COp 0 O 0 Z Q 2of2 PROJECT No. 3128.0 JOB No. 03-05-0271